Kykronberg's Waterfall
I disagree with you....................................
I'm kind of double sided on the topic. There are goods and bads on each side. We can either have complete freedom or be safe...
But if i wrote something like "bomb" or "Terrorist" or some king of word that would be a trigger word in like a facebook status... I don't wanna be called out by the government... And there are facebook accounts that do that kind of stuff for a joke also fake twitters.. Like Helen Keller!!
Haha wern't you just agreeing with abby that you were for the goveernment taking over the internet?
But that can't always be a good thing... If there are limits on everything on the internet, That can effect sites like social media!
I don't think restrictions should go onto the internet or social media. But besides that, they could make law or do something to keep the internet safe. But I really don't think the government should completely control the internet.
It is a balanced government. That's why there are three branches. So the president doesn't have too much power or any other of the branches for that matter. If the constitution was to get ratified... Everyone would have to agree and getting parties to agree isn't the easiest thing in the world
The states should have more power... the states have decisions and ideas how it wants to be run. It wouldn't be too good to let the government have too much power..
I agree, But the constitution could change as amendments are added. The last amendment was added in 2006 which could possibly mean a difference in the constitution.
True... Very true. It can be REALLY hard to get an agreement out of both parties. Especially when your dealing with groups that have different imputes.
I would improve it. Things change, rules change through even a year of time. An update to it would be good.
If you were an anti-Federalist, you wouldn't be for the constitution.... You would be against it..
